Posted
by
samzenpus
on Thursday June 24, 2010 @09:44AM
from the but-I-want-an-unhappy-meal dept.

cosm writes "Looks like personal responsibility died a little bit again today. From the article: 'A watchdog group says giving away toys with Happy Meals contributes to childhood obesity, and threatens to sue. The [watchdog] organization on Tuesday served the fast food giant with a letter expressing its intent to sue if toys are not removed. The letter is legally required in several states before lawsuits can be brought under consumer protection statutes. ..."McDonald's is the stranger in the playground handing out candy to children," Stephen Gardner, litigation director for the advocacy group, said in a statement. "McDonald's use of toys undercuts parental authority and exploits young children's developmental immaturity."'"

Half the problem is that fast foods are engineered to inhibit the signals that tell us that we have had enough of a specific nutrient. With natural foods, we stop feeling like the food when we have had enough (see how many bananas you can eat before they lose their appeal) . This level of bio-engineering should be made illegal. The reason people are getting fat is because we do not get that natural response when eating fast food. Going after the toys is simply going after they symptom of the problem,

I do not think that they employ anything complicated like that. It's more like "serial manufacturing" or "mass production" (compare to "cooking").

Occasionally when I get something from fast food, I get the feeling that their food is simply "empty". One feels full for a short time - often very short time - but the food apparently contains close to 0 of what my body actually needs. Why shortly after I feel hunger again.

If I were in the environment where there were no other choices but fast food, I'm su

I work for McDonald's, at the corporate offices. This is not an official statement in any way by McDonald's. That said...

I have sat in presentations by the head chef and company and department meetings with our high level executives. As a company McDonald's really does care about freshness, nutrition, and good health. It is not just public relations.

Complete - stunningly complete - nutritional information is available both in the restaurants (as a brochure) and on the web site.

Well, the issue isn't so much overfeeding as it is allowing a screaming child who "wants a TOY!!!!!" to overrule parental judgement. So far as I'm concerned McDonalds has done nothing wrong, in fact adding carrots as an option over fries was a GOOD thing. But parents can be weak and so it's not so much that they overfeed as it is they cannot say no.

That said, a McD's small hamburger is 250cals, with cheese 300 as I recall. The small fries add say another 150-200cals. To a parent, or someone like me on a die

Is it better? It costs us in the food resources that are being wasted over the lifetime of the morbidly obese, medical costs, and dedication of medical professionals to help with patients who aren't willing to help themselves. Consider the other additional problems, where ambulances have to be made larger to accommodate the oversized patients, larger tools (everything from stretchers to MRI machines), and even when they pass, oversized accommodations must be made at the cemetery.

I went to the doctor recently, and joked that I am fat (I'm 155 lbs at 5'8"). He laughed, but pointed out that they had a new scale. The old one only went to 400 pounds. My doctor personally sent a person to a large animal hospital, because they couldn't find an MRI machine that could take anyone that size. Even if you look at the high end of a height/weight chart, someone who's 6'8", the high normal weight should be 216. We're not talking about extremely muscular athletes, we're talking about people who can't see their own shoes to tie them, because too many fat folds are in the way.

Even someone very muscular, like Arnold Schwarzenegger when he was winning body building trophies was only 250lbs at 6'2". There's no excuse for anyone to be 350+ pounds.

We're going to kill ourselves, and that's not just the morbidly obese. They are putting a huge demand on the food supply, which hurts everyone who wants to eat. When you hear about the morbidly obese and their diet, they eat enough in a day to feed a normal healthy person for a week (or more).

"Even if you look at the high end of a height/weight chart, someone who's 6'8", the high normal weight should be 216."

This is utter nonsense. I have a cousin who stands at 6'8" and isn't especially athletic. He is quite fit: he watches his diet, works out three days a week, and barely has any visible fat on him. His weight? 235 pounds. Likewise, I'm 6'1" and if I weighed what those idiotic charts say I should weigh, I'd be skin and bones. At my lowest adult weight, I was 205 lbs and had a 30 inch waist belo

No, actually you're arguing the finer points of the charts. I was simply referencing where the lines were drawn the the "experts".

You mention folks over 6', with weights in the low to mid 200's. My complaint was where weights were frequently exceeding 400 pounds, and sadly if you've spent any significant time people-watching, you'll see that they aren't always even near 6'.

I was underweight for most of the first 20-some years. Then I bounced over to "overweigh

Both IMDB [imdb.com] and Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] list him to be 6'2". While Wikipedia can be questionable, IMDB is pretty accurate with their information, often maintained by the celebrity (or their agent).

I'll pick on anyone, I'm an equal opportunity offender. I'll pick on fat people because they are fat. There are genetic reasons to be overweight, but for the majority of people, it is not a genetic disorder. It is a decision. They decide to eat more than they can burn, and the excess is stored. If you're overweight, and eat like you aren't, you will find that your weight will drop. It's as simple as that. The part that isn't easy is that modern society makes food readily available to

Didn't that guy bring this up with Supersize me like years ago? Haven't they already had to face lawsuits because "Eating McDonalds makes you fat"?

I swear, is no one responsible for their own actions anymore? Don't get me wrong, I don't think what McDonald's does is right, but if you play the "I'm not in control of what I eat" card, you deserve to become obese.

But, it's cheaper to eat McD's that actual fresh food from a grocery store -- both in terms of $$, and time. And, in Super Size Me, he actually went through withdrawal when he didn't have that crap. Your body starts to crave the high sugar/high fat.

You start giving a four year McD's on a regular basis, putting it into schools and whatnot, you're going to end up with this proble

I still don't get people who try and tell me that eating out is cheaper than cooking. I make something that my Dad calls chicken surprise (the surprise is there's no chicken) for about $10 which gives me lunch all week and 4 dinners. I can't afford to eat unhealthily.

Time spent next to your dying child's bed as he's hooked up to dialysis for salt-induced renal failure while the doctor tells you that the lack of a lifestyle change the last time around makes him ineligible for a second transplant == priceless.

Mmmm... Those 15 minutes each day spent queueing instead of cooking sure were worth it.

Well if the topic were MONEY I'd suggest the 69cent instant noodles you can get from any supermarket. A meal for under $2

Cheap and fast doesn't have to be unhealthy. Example: Here in the UK, the cheapest McDonalds burger costs 1 pound.A packet of Sainsbury's basics or ASDA noodles (that's walmart for you people across the pond) can be had for about 9 or 10 p. Preparation time is about 4 minutes. To make it a proper meal, upgrade it: For example with an egg (15p), half an onion (5p), a tomato (10p) and half

Hmm I can get each family member (6 of us) a burger and fry for $2 each.. $12 total and they are all bitching at me 2 hours later because they are still hungry..Or I can feed all of them for $5-10 and about 30 minutes of my time. As a bonus I still have leftovers I can take to work for Lunch the next day.

Now for single people I'll have to admit.. cooking for one person sucks.. You either make way to much or there isn't enough material in the pan to cook properly.

What are you talking about? Big Mac combo is about $6.50 in Seattle. A deluxe combo is about $7.50. A happy meal is about $4.50. It's more expensive to eat at McD's than it is to eat at home. My average home cooked meal costs between 75 cents to $5 depending on whether I'm eating spaghetti or steak. For a child under 12 it's even lower.

You have to know where to shop to get it under $3 a meal. Here we have a few stores: Costco, Bargain Mart, Cash & Carry, and Walmart. Typical prices at Bargain Mart on 4t

It's a "McDonalds tries to control what my children eat" card. Some parents leave their children from their sights once in a while to teach them responsibility. You could argue that McDonalds tries to abuse that.

By definition, any business that produces and/or sells a non-essential product is abusing stupidity. Buying non-essential products could also be easily considered as stupidity, especially if you favor them over essential products.

Those parents teaching their kids about responsibility by letting them loose and not educating them about product quality is blatant stupidity. It's like opening a checking account for your kid and then handing them the checkbook without another word of advise. Is the kid seriou

I swear, is no one responsible for their own actions anymore? Don't get me wrong, I don't think what McDonald's does is right, but if you play the "I'm not in control of what I eat" card, you deserve to be euthenased.

FTFY. Being in control of what you eat is easy. When you see the sale on a jumbo pack of 72 pancakes with some of that lovely high-fructose corn syrup you love to drizzle over, don't buy it. Walking past a $2.99 all-you-can-eat fried food buffet? You bet! Walk straight past! Grab a banana.

Unless you are tied down to a chair and being spoon fed can after can of refried beans Gluttony-scene-from-Seven style, you are in control of what you eat. Get some willpower. And if you're doing this to your kids, you de

Obviously that's the parents being sterilised. No doubt the type-2 diabetes and reduced kidney function from excessive salt intake will screw up their fertility before they get past their 20th birthday.

Oh, I'm quite sure that there's a 12-step program for those people that starts with something akin to "I admit that I am powerless over my food addiction and only someone else can save me".

What really blows is that these people have SO low self esteem that they can't even fathom they they, and nobody else, beat the habit. They accomplished that. Nobody else. But that won't work. They would never believe that they, and they alone, got anything done right. And instead of giving them a self esteem boost during

This watchdog group is implying parents need help keeping their kids away from McDonalds. Are parents incapable of saying "no honey, we're going to eat in tonight" or "no we're going to... instead" or "no you can't have a Big Mac and fries, but you can have the grilled chicken sandwich and a fruit salad." When do lawyers become more important to our society than parental responsibility? It's just all backwards.

"How do you explain calorie balance, saturated fats and the like to three-year old?"

You don't, you impose (gentle) discipline. They don't get the reasons for the orders they are given until they can understand them. I got to see the results of a wide variety of child-rearing methods among recruits in the USAF and in community college where I work. The key to happily competent SELF-discipline is early, IMPOSED discipline (no, not Lee Ermey in Full Metal Jacket if you are dealing with a child, though his char

My boys get their choice of restaurant foods once a week. It's usually McNuggets and apple slices from McDonald's or a grilled cheese sandwich and banana from Sonic. Our choices are limited here, so that's really all they know that they like. They've been told that having too much food from places like that is bad, but that's all they've been told. I for one am not going to create body image problems in my 3- and 5-year old sons by telling them that they'll get fat if they eat too much. I simply control what they eat so that they develop healthy appetites.

Children do need to learn to accept that their parents understand things that are above them. I do my best to answer all the questions my kids have. They are already both considered gifted and are well above their age levels on education, but some things are beyond their comprehension and I'm not going to tell them something that might result in them completely misunderstanding my answers.

So that my five-year-old who already has issues with death (he lost a dog, a great grandmother, and a great uncle all in the past year) can spend the next six months freaking out about whether or not the food he's eating will kill him.

A 3 year old is perfectly capable of understanding "stuff that makes you grow" versus "stuff that makes you fat" or "stuff that gives you energy". You don't have to patronize young humans. They've got much more inherent talent than older people who do nothing but make excuses.

As a father of two four year old girls, all I can say is : either you're extremely lucky, or you never had kids... and you definitely never really watched ads targeted at kids.

The kids I know (that's including my daughters, nieces, cousins and the other kids in the kindergarten ) are very receptive to logical arguments, they understand them, and they don't give a fucking damn. All they want is the miniature shrek. And once they've seen that there are fries coming with it they'll want those too. Thankfully,

My daughter said something a few years back that made me smile. She may have been 7 or 8 at the time. Out of the blue, she very matter of factly stated that "Companies make things on commercials look better than they really are, just to make you want to buy them."

Kids are only coercive and manipulative when they've been indoctrinated into hierarchical thinking. In (very rare, isolated) non hierarchical societies, where kids are not beaten regularly, don't have their genitals mutilated, are held until they don't want to be anymore, and never sleep alone, they do not rebel and do what adults want them to without being beaten into it. Think about it, what is the evolutionary advantage of untrained, unskilled young humans rebelling against the wishes of their elders? No

McDonald's is the stranger in the playground handing out candy to children. Somebody obviously misunderstands the intentions of the stranger handing out candy. Hint: He's not trying to make the kids fat!

As long as you understand that McDonald's, Chuck E. Cheese, et. al are playgrounds subsidized by food sales, I don't see why anyone should have a problem with it. Just don't delude yourself that their primary aim is to provide nutrition. Sounds like some parents are incapable of saying "no" to their kids, so they want the government to do if for them!

There's this little thing that parents seem to forget these days called "saying no".

When my daughter would ask to go to McDonald's, I would say no. She may have thrown a fit the first few times, but I didn't let it get to me. Eventually, she stopped asking.

I see so many parents say something like "Well I don't think that's a good idea..." the kids then throw a fit and they give in to avoid the screaming. All this does is teaches them that screaming gets them what they want. It's bad for you an

Over here in Australia 'Maccers' is giving out shrek ear toys in happy meals only if the kid has 'ogre apples' (cut up apples, should be onions imo) instead of fries. Seems they are realising the only way to make kids healthy is buying them off.

This doesn't help. This teaches kids that they get benefits before earning them. The kid can have the "ogre apples" and get the ears, then throw the apples on the floor and scream for fries.

It's not 'Maccers' fault, it's the parents. Just saying that kids are smart little bastards, and very capable of working the system to get what they want. Best to just teach them what's good and bad, and explain why, then let them make the decision (And by that, I mean "eat the red berries" yourself and eat healthy food

Over here in Australia 'Maccers' is giving out shrek ear toys in happy meals only if the kid has 'ogre apples' (cut up apples, should be onions imo) instead of fries. Seems they are realising the only way to make kids healthy is buying them off.

Actually, I think that this is a good solution to the problem. The kids are still eating the burgers/nuggets which are not exactly healthy, but at least you are putting something healthy into the mix. And yes, I do think that Apples are healthy;-)

1. The brain is a biological organ like any other, able to be manipulated and programmed - "personal responsibility" is a philosophical fiction with a certain limited degree of practical application (e.g. to legal principles) but which cannot be applied to a scientific analysis of animal behaviour;

2. Few/.ers may be in kids' advertising, but it works and it works and then it works some more - if you think there is no problem with encouraging bad behaviour "because no-one's forcing you to do it" then you ought to question your premises;

3. In particular, if you think anyone should be able to make a buck as long as they're not putting a gun to your head, your position is one of self-interest and your opinion is motivated by creating a world full of people fucking each other over;

4. "Parents need to acquiesce less to kids' demands" and "McDonalds should stop pounding kids with advertising to help them get fat" are not mutually exclusive. If you wonder why everyone's eating out and getting fat, perhaps you should cut through the screen of political correctness and check out how families were generally arranged 30 years ago - who isn't at home now to make the meals?

One of the major problems with the country is the lack of willpower exhibited by supposed adults. It's even worse when we are talking about parents. I don't fault McDonald's in their efforts, I do fault parent's inability to say no. It's not hard, certainly not hard when your child understands that YOU are in charge.

Who do you propose we put in charge of monitoring companies? A government agency? That's never a good answer, as most government agencies couldn't find their ass with both hands.

Yes, yes. We get it. What you're really saying is, "Look at me! I have my shit together! I'm smarter and stronger, and everybody should strive to be me!"

So, fine then. Good for you! Here's a gold sticker! You should be praised and patted on the head.

People who rail on about personal responsibility are often the least aware people on the planet. They really, honestly, truly believe that they are indestructible, that they are immune to mind programming.

Except...I'm not being strapped down, force fed bullshit. It's advertising, and I have the option of walking away from it. The will power argument applies here, strictly BECAUSE it's one's choice whether they pay attention or not.

Except...I'm not being strapped down, force fed bullshit. It's advertising, and I have the option of walking away from it. The will power argument applies here, strictly BECAUSE it's one's choice whether they pay attention or not.

Yes, you are VERY special.

You probably have a healthy brain, were probably fed well as a child, you probably had authority figures in your life who placed importance on critical thinking and passed those values on to you, you probably had access to books and time and space to develop a strong will and the ability to discern lies from truth.

A great many people do NOT have those benefits.

You are working from a state of high benefit to condemn those who are not as smart as or as gifted as you as though these a

If you want to boil it down to such a question, then yes; it is morally and ethically OK to trick a person ( not a dog, straw man again ) when they have a choice otherwise.

Unless you want to argue that only a small subset of people in the world ( or this country ) are responsible for their own choices, and as such only those can be held responsible for their actions. That's not a road I want to go down, nor is it sustainable in any sense.

2. Few/.ers may be in kids' advertising, but it works and it works and then it works some more - if you think there is no problem with encouraging bad behaviour "because no-one's forcing you to do it" then you ought to question your premises;

You're letting your kids watch television with ads, there is your first mistake.

The only kids that will get fat from happy meals are the ones which are taken to McD by their parents. How does taking away the toy help? "No sweety, they don't have the meal with the toys anymore, but you can have the big McTasty instead"...
Educate the parents, for f***s sake. McD only delivers because there is a demand. Get rid of the demand, problem solved.

The point is not that MacDonald's serves crap. We all know MacDonald's serves crap. Even MacDonald's knows MacDonald's serves crap, which is why they are constantly saying "look! We have these non-crap things on the menu, TOO!" (And even when they do that, they point to their alternative to fries -- apples you can dip in a sugar mixture. Brilliant.)

The issue is advertising to children.

To quote the article: "Citing toys aimed at promoting the latest "Shrek" movie, the Center for Science in the Public Interest said that the plastic promotions lure children into McDonald's restaurants where they are then likely to order food that is too high in calories, fat and salt."

The important part of this line should be: "Citing toys aimed at promoting the latest "Shrek" movie, the Center for Science in the Public Interest said that the plastic promotions lure children into McDonald's restaurants" Because that is ILLEGAL.

Advertising to children is not legal. It's something that we, as a society, have looked the other way on for many, many years, but there are laws aimed at preventing it. When you advertise to children, you externalize the cost of advertising to the parents because the children will nag the parents until they cave. Influencing adults costs a lot more, when you do it directly, and sometimes it's just impossible. Many parents wouldn't dream of ever taking their kids to MacDonald's, but cave when they're shrilly begged for MacDonald's for the 400th time. You want to keep your children healthy by keeping them from eating that crap, but it's far, far easier to cave than to fight your kids every single day, and even if you do, their sitter or grandmother or even their teacher on a field trip will cave. It's practically an irresistible force.

I once talked to a MacDonald's ad man (a woman, in this case) who proudly pointed out to me that Ronald never eats the burgers. You see, any MacDonald's ad is broken into segments. The entertainment segments don't advertise. The advertisement is only the parts where Ronald isn't on screen. The parts where Ronald is on screen is apparently a friggin' PSA.

The toys in the Happy meal are supposedly a value item to help an adult make a judgment to buy a happy meal because it will both feed and entertain his/her child. That's value. That's also bullshit. The toy, as we all know, is there because kids will want to go to MacDonald's to get the toy.

the Center for Science in the Public Interest said that the plastic promotions lure children into McDonald's restaurants" Because that is ILLEGAL....
They're advertising to children. They need to stop.

Holy shit. That is the dumbest fucking think I've ever heard (including the time I heard, "Just fuckin, fuckin, fuckin, fuck you, Paul"). I'll take your word (at least for the sake of this conversation) on the fact that it actually is illegal.

you externalize the cost of advertising to the parents because the children will nag the parents until they cave

Boo fucking hoo. Might as well make it illegal to sell candy bars at grocery stores (or gas stations or baseball games or cafeterias or vending machines) because kids are going to nag parents. Might as well make it illegal to put Transformers on shoes or Sponge Bob on